I am writing to comment on your recent article ("Prosecutors: Inquiry into dog park shooting may take another week," Aug. 17) because in many ways it parallels a similar incident in which I was involved on January 16, 2009.
I am appalled at what happened. There are always alternatives to murdering someone's pet. Also, a police officer who is trained to deal with difficult situations should be held to a higher standard. I am concerned that the investigating police force will "whitewash" the shooter's actions. That's what happened in my situation.
An off-duty policeman has no more rights than any other private citizen. I want to be able to hope for a full, impartial investigation of this shooting, but I am not optimistic about this happening. The "blue wall" of police protecting other police is very real. We see this on television every day and read about this in newspapers every day.
I am hoping that you will follow up on this story and not allow the police to vindicate the shooter's actions (unless, of course, there were, in fact, valid reasons for the shooting). My experience was that in my case, that the local police accepted the lies of the shooter while trying to get me to change my account to conform to the shooter's. Ultimately, the local police did not file charges against the shooter.
The district attorney told me that even though she did not believe any part of the shooter's story, the police accepted it, and she did not want to spoil a "good working relationship" she had with the police. In my view, she willingly became part of the whitewashing.
We had local TV coverage, and also coverage in local newspapers, as well as other locales throughout the U.S.
I fear that the shooter will get away with this and I hope that you are able to put enough light on this to get the truth to prevail.
Stan Rosenblatt, Lansdale, PA